Science of course, where it belongs.
Within twenty years "Intelligent design theories" will be taught along side of "evolutionary theories" as a matter of a complete education
I know you have a problem seeing it as science because of your bias, but evolution went though the same process. What did it take, almost sixty years.?
Cool, what kind of experiments are being conducted? What new discoveries are on the horizon? What engineering applications do you for see?
Within twenty years "Intelligent design theories" will be taught along side of "evolutionary theories" as a matter of a complete education
I know you have a problem seeing it as science because of your bias, but evolution went though the same process. What did it take, almost sixty years.?
You confuse me with someone else. I know nothing of "Intelligent design theories".
That could be true. But first ID must have a working theory that can make testable predictions. It doesn't. If evolution is a theory (which it is and it isn't), then ID is a conjecture. The main ID workhorses spend 95% of their time writing anti-evolutionary screeds for the Discovery Institute or they appear on Dr. James Dobson's show (like Phil Johnson did last week), or they spend time talking to church groups, or they spend time talking to Congress. But never do you hear about the next great Nature paper that will be released about the first accurate measurements of Complex Specified Information, or any new announcements of any new progresses in ID theory. Is that because the main brains of the think tank are too busy influencing public opinion when they should be trying to make ID an actual scientific theory? Why is ISCID offering $100 to the best ideas posted to their site? It can't be because scientists are flocking to their banner, right?
ID has a lot of work ahead of it, if it is to be determined that it can be a viable theory. But that work only can be done when there are people there to work on it. All of those people are too busy doing other things, it appears. Maybe they should reexamine their priorities, eh?